And what, if I may ask, happened to Jesus’ physical body. You know, the one that died on the Cross?
Spiritual body, yes, but in some way he kept HIS original flesh and bones, as well . The Greek term sarx has that specific meaning. The tomb was empty.
As neither of these Persons was ever a human being, the question of a human body for either does not arise.
You can become a Catholic by knowing very little. You claimed to know just about everything. My point was to observe this exaggeration on your part. It caused me to question what you have to say.
That’s a very good attitude, and a very good reason to be on this site (I wish more people took that approach). If you’re open to learning more you will discover more about these matters of conscience and morality, etc. That’s how to improve your interpretation.
I was referring to the claim of knowing “just about everything”. There’s a lot to know in Catholic teaching: moral theology, ecclesiology, lives of the saints, spiritual practices, mystical theology, Catholic history, Catholic social teaching, aesthetics, Catholic philosophy, liturgy, dogmatics … much more.
What do you mean that the basis of Catholicism is a logical contradiction? How did you arrive at that conclusion?
Its not about dreaming up reasons not to believe. But rather it is about looking at scripture intelligently and critically so as to gain the correct understanding of what is being said; instead of taking it at face value like a child. Metaphors and analogies are in danger of consuming the truth when placed in the hands of somebody who does not ask what the nature of that truth is. It is legitimate to ask and consider whether or not some part of scripture is speaking analogously of something.
The glorified body then is what? To me you sound as though you are skating perilously close to the older and heretical ideas that matter is evil and only the ‘spiritual’ is pure, and good, and eternal. . .
Ask the Church.
I agree.
That’s a great question.
I think you should ask the church.
His body was transformed into a glorious body - as one might expect of one who sacrificed Himself to show us the true meaning of love…
Are you sure you are an atheist? I believe I’m a Catholic but I’m not infallible!
It is possible I’m a heretic but what counts most is how we live not what we claim to believe…
Because its evidently more than necessary and it is thus malicious; existing to satisfy an emotional and human lust for revenge, reducing God to the imperfect nature and standards of a human being. The only reason you are refusing to see it is because you think that you have to believe it by faith. But God never said don’t use your brain when reading the scripture.
Irrefutable logic.Because its evidently more than necessary and it is thus malicious; existing to satisfy an emotional and human lust for revenge, reducing God to the imperfect nature and standards of a human being. The only reason you are refusing to see it is because you think that you have to believe it by faith. But God never said don’t use your brain when reading the scripture.
God is intrinsically love. That means that God never takes back what he gives. God eternally expresses love and does not change. The only way you can be separated from him is if you reject him; otherwise it is impossible to go to hell.
Punishment, rationally speaking, exists to set an example. Punishment exists so that we can learn from it, so that the person in question can change. Hell is not punishment in the usual sense of the word, or at least not in the way that humans use it. Its used analogously, depicting God in the same limited imperfect context of a human judge and presenting his actions in the context of human actions, emotions, etcetera etcetera. They depict hell as a “fire” in order give a sense of incredible suffering; because they have experienced the pain of fire and thought that this would be a good analogy or metaphor for the suffering of hell.
It not difficult. What reason can God have for burning people alive? There is no rational or necessary reason for it. It is enough that people are separated from eternal happiness. God does not will anything arbitrarily, and God does not respond to sin out of uncontrollable emotional anger. God does that which necessarily fulfills love. God eternally wills Heaven and nothing else.
Heaven is a spiritual experience. Its not a castle made out of diamonds and gold.
Hell is a spiritual experience. It is not a lake of fire.
Wake up!!!
Lots of things are beyond our experience but we can still understand them. Like the song says, I’ve never been to Spain, but I’ve been to Oklahoma.
Why not both? If you are right, and we cannot understand Hell as a place, or a fire, or physical torture, then even less can we understand it as “a state of mind.” You’re just saying Hell is unfathomable. If it’s totally transcendent of human undestanding, it might be wonderful, in some odd way, who knows?
This ought to wake you up. This is what Mary showed the children at Fatima.Because its evidently more than necessary and it is thus malicious; existing to satisfy an emotional and human lust for revenge, reducing God to the imperfect nature and standards of a human being. The only reason you are refusing to see it is because you think that you have to believe it by faith. But God never said don’t use your brain when reading the scripture.
God is intrinsically love. That means that God never takes back what he gives. God eternally expresses love and does not change. The only way you can be separated from him is if you reject him; otherwise it is impossible to go to hell.
Punishment, rationally speaking, exists to set an example. Punishment exists so that we can learn from it, so that the person in question can change. Hell is not punishment in the usual sense of the word, or at least not in the way that humans use it. Its used analogously, depicting God in the same limited imperfect context of a human judge and presenting his actions in the context of human actions, emotions, etcetera etcetera. They depict hell as a “fire” in order give a sense of incredible suffering; because they have experienced the pain of fire and thought that this would be a good analogy or metaphor for the suffering of hell.
It not difficult. What reason can God have for burning people alive? There is no rational or necessary reason for it. It is enough that people are separated from eternal happiness. God does not will anything arbitrarily, and God does not respond to sin out of uncontrollable emotional anger. God does only that which necessarily fulfills love. God eternally wills Heaven and nothing else.
Its very simple.
- Heaven is a spiritual experience. Its not a physical castle made out of diamonds and gold. Its an analogous representation of eternal happiness with God; and the authors used that symbolic idea because they like Gold and diamonds and precious stones.
- Hell is a spiritual experience. It is not a lake of fire. Its an analogous representation of eternal separation from God. They use the idea of fire, because they know of the excruciating suffering that comes with the fact of being burned.
Wake up!!!
Jesus never said that hell is a physical fire. Not once has he ever made a direct statement pertaining to the physical nature of hell, literally speaking. He does make a statement about hell, but it is clear that he only ever used fire as an analogy; and any attempt to say that he meant it literally is idle speculation; especially given the fact that Jesus is famous for parables.
Are you asking me to take the symbolic nature of visions literally? I suppose that before the world ends there is going to be a dragon with many heads, and God and his angels are going to come riding in on horses from the heavens???
Is that pride allegorical or real?
Not really. When given the fact that there is much parable, metaphor, allegory/analogy, and story telling in the bible, it far from idle speculation.
